<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> <meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"> <style></style> </head> <body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="#954F72"> <div class="WordSection1"> Did you make sure to stuart_update? It will pull a dependency repo that is only needed for CI. <o:p> </o:p> - Bret <o:p> </o:p> </div> <hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1"> <div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr">From: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 2:31:13 PM To: rfc@edk2.groups.io <rfc@edk2.groups.io>; Bret Barkelew <Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io>; Andrew Fish <afish@apple.com>; Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com> Subject: RE: [edk2-rfc] [EXTERNAL] Re: [edk2-devel] EDK2 Host-Based Unit Test RFC (Now with docs!) <div> </div> </div> <div class="BodyFragment"> <div class="PlainText">Hi Bret, I am looking at the latest version of the content on your branch. I am confused by MdePkg/Test/MdePkgTest.dsc. It makes references to lib classes and packages that do not exist. CmockaLib|CmockaHostUnitTestPkg/Library/CmockaLib/CmockaLib.inf OsServiceLib|HostBasedUnitTestPkg/Library/OsServiceLibHost/OsServiceLibHost.inf UnitTestAssertLib|CmockaHostUnitTestPkg/Library/UnitTestAssertLibcmocka/UnitTestAssertLibcmocka.inf UnitTestLib|CmockaHostUnitTestPkg/Library/UnitTestLibcmocka/UnitTestLibcmocka.inf Am I looking at an old file? I am just trying to do a local build of the unit tests for the SafeIntLib. Thanks, Mike > -----Original Message----- > From: rfc@edk2.groups.io <rfc@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf > Of Bret Barkelew via Groups.Io > Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2019 12:07 PM > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Andrew Fish > <afish@apple.com>; Kinney, Michael D > <michael.d.kinney@intel.com> > Cc: rfc@edk2.groups.io > Subject: Re: [edk2-rfc] [EXTERNAL] Re: [edk2-devel] > EDK2 Host-Based Unit Test RFC (Now with docs!) > > The host-based tests now build on Linux/GCC, but the > final executables don't seem to get created. Don't know > where the disconnect is there. I can see the test get > compiled (along with all the libraries), but it doesn't > seem to link. > > Can you take a look? Thanks! > > - Bret > > From: Bret Barkelew<<a href="mailto:Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com">mailto:Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com</a>> > Sent: Friday, December 13, 2019 4:46 PM > To: devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>; > Andrew Fish<<a href="mailto:afish@apple.com">mailto:afish@apple.com</a>>; Kinney, Michael > D<<a href="mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com">mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com</a>> > Cc: rfc@edk2.groups.io<<a href="mailto:rfc@edk2.groups.io">mailto:rfc@edk2.groups.io</a>> > Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: [edk2-devel] EDK2 Host- > Based Unit Test RFC (Now with docs!) > > Mike, > > I think I've gotten all the feedback here and all the > action items from our call. The current branch should > be good to go, minus the couple of things that Intel > was going to look into. > > Thanks! > > - Bret > > From: Bret Barkelew<<a href="mailto:Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com">mailto:Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com</a>> > Sent: Friday, December 6, 2019 2:21 PM > To: devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>; > Andrew Fish<<a href="mailto:afish@apple.com">mailto:afish@apple.com</a>>; Kinney, Michael > D<<a href="mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com">mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com</a>> > Cc: rfc@edk2.groups.io<<a href="mailto:rfc@edk2.groups.io">mailto:rfc@edk2.groups.io</a>> > Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: [edk2-devel] EDK2 Host- > Based Unit Test RFC (Now with docs!) > > > 1. I see that MdePkg adds a dependency on > UnitTestPkg. This makes UnitTestPkg the root package > when building and running host based unit tests. This > makes sense, but good to highlight that all packages > that use host based tests will introduce a new package > dependency on UnitTestPkg. > * Since the dependency only applies to unit > tests, can we update the DependencyCheck plugin to > support listing dependencies for FW components separate > from dependencies for unit tests? > * Can move. Capability is there, but mistakenly > added to the wrong section. > 2. I see UnitTestPkg declares 6 new lib classes. > Are all 6 classes intended to be used directly from a > unit test case? If some of these are only intended to > be used from the framework inside the UnitTestPkg can > we make them private? > * Because there are different instances in > multiple places (and conceivably more in the future), > we don't see how we could make them private. > 3. In the MdePkg, I see a new top level directory > called 'HostLibrary'. Since these lib instances are > only used from a host based test, can they be moved > into the 'Test' directory? > * Can move. > 4. MdePkg/MdePkgTest.dsc. > * Can this DSC file be moved into the 'Test' > directory? > > > i. Yes > > * I see this DSC file only supports VS today. > How much work is it to add GCC support? > > > i. Don't know. This is an item on our list, but > lower priority and not a blocker. > > 1. MdePkg/HostLibrary/BaseLibHost > * Why are there 2 INFs. One with ASM and one > without ASM? Can we just use the one with ASM and > assume NASM is installed? > * I see the purpose of this lib instance is to > call the > * SetJump()/LongJump(). So these > implementations always work? It looks like it assumes > BASE_LIBRARY_JUMP_BUFFER is identical to the host OS > user mode application setjmp()/longjmp() state. > * Why are DRx and CRx registers emulated? I > would think and code that depends on read/writing these > registers would not be compatible with host based > testing. Can we change to ASSERT (FALSE)? > * PatchInstructionX86() - I suspect this will > not work in a host based environment because it is self > modifying code. Should it be ASSERT (FALSE)? > * Libraries were taken directly from the Intel > work in HBFA. They worked so we kept them. We're just > as interested in the answers to these questions as you > are. > 2. MdePkg/HostLibrary/DebugLibHost > * What is '#ifndef TEST_WITH_KLEE' > * What is the 'PatchFormat()' function? It is > always disabled with if (0). > * Are the PCDs to set the debug message levels > disabled on purpose? (DebugPrintEnabled(), > DebugPrintLevelEnabled(), DebugCodeEnabled()) > * Libraries were taken directly from the Intel > work in HBFA. They worked so we kept them. We're just > as interested in the answers to these questions as you > are. > 3. MdePkg/HostLibrary/BaseMemoryLibHost > * Why can't we use > MdePkg/Library/BaseMemoryLib/BaseMemoryLib/inf instead > and reduce the number of host specific lib instances? > * Libraries were taken directly from the Intel > work in HBFA. They worked so we kept them. We're just > as interested in the answers to these questions as you > are. > 4. MdePkg/HostLibrary/MemoryAllocationLibHost > * Why is are memcpy(), assert(), memset() used > in this lib? I would expect this lib instance to match > the UefiMemoryAllocationLib with the only the use of > malloc() and free() to replace the UEFI Boot Services > calls. > * Libraries were taken directly from the Intel > work in HBFA. They worked so we kept them. We're just > as interested in the answers to these questions as you > are. > 5. Host library instance naming conventions. > * The current naming convention uses the > environment as a prefix(e.g. Pei, Smm, Uefi) and the > services the lib instance uses as a post fix. Would it > make more sense to use 'Host' as a prefix instead of a > postfix in the lib instance names? > * I don't know if there's a 1:1 relationship > with these. For some library classes (that you might > have host versions of), the class itself is the > PeiSomethingLib, and the host version would be the > PeiSomethingLibHost. No? > 6. Unicode vs ASCII strings > * I see InitUnitTestFramework(), > CreateUnitTestSuite(), and AddTestCase() all take > Unicode strings for the labels. I also see extra code > to convert gEfiCallerBaseName from ASCII to Unicode to > use it as a short name of a test framework. I think it > would be simpler if the parameters to these APIs were > ASCII and the framework can convert to Unicode if > needed. > * No strong feelings, but we already have a > bunch of tests written this way. Since the UnitTestLib > is an abstraction that works as well in Shell as in the > Host, going with Unicode strings seemed to match the > art for Shell apps (since the framework was written for > Shell first). > 7. Will InitUnitTestFramework() and > CreateUnitTestSuite() always be called in pairs? If > so, can we combine these to a single API? > * I see the SafeIntLib example create a single > framework and multiple test suites. Perhaps we can > have a single CreateUnitTestSuite() API where Framework > is an IN/OUT and if it is passed in as NULL, the > Framework handle is created. > > > i. It's not always in pairs. You would only have a > single framework init, but could have multiple suites. > > * I see a pattern where the > CreateUnitTestSuite() 'Package' parameter is used as a > prefix to every call to AddTestCase() in the > 'ClassName' parameter. Can we simplify AddTestCase() > so it only need to pass in the name of the unit test > case, and the framework can append Package and the > unit test case name? > > > i. Right now, our tests just coincidentally share > similar names with the packages, but we don't feel this > is axiomatic and don't want to force this naming on > others, who may be trying to bolt into other reporting > structures. > > 1. I see the use of the 'Fw' variable as a shorthand > for 'Framework'. Can we use something other than 'Fw'. > It may be confused with 'Firmware'. > * No real arguments. Wouldn't fight a find- > replace, but it'll just be a bunch of touches as we > commit. > 2. UnitTestPkg/Include/UnitTestTypes.h > * I see several hard coded string lengths. > Since this runs in a host environment and strings can > always be allocated, can the hard coded lengths be > removed? Update the structs to use pointers to strings > instead of string arrays, and the framework can manage > alloc() and free()? > > > i. Given that this framework is designed to be > nimble enough to work in PEI and SMM and other > constrictive environments, we wanted to keep fixed > sizing. > > * How are Fingerprints used? The idea of using > as hash as a unique identifier is a good idea. How is > the hash calculated? What unit test code artifacts are > used so developers know what parameters must be unique? > Can we just decide to use a specific hash > algorithm/size and the structure can be a pointer to an > allocated buffer instead of a fixed size array to make > it easy to change the algorithm/size in the future? > > > i. Fingerprints are unique IDs to make sure that > serialize/unserialized state matches the tests upon re- > entry. I'm not married to MD5, but it needs to be > predictably unique, and carried with the framework. I > would not want to make any requirements on CryptoLib, > since these aren't crypto-strong. > > * Update all the strings to be ASCII? See > Unicode vs ASCII above. > > > i. Ideally not, unless there's a strong use case. > > * UNIT_TEST_SAVE_TEST - The last field is a > variable sized array, so it can be a formal field. > > > i. Not opposed, but don't really want to make the > change myself. Is there a style guide that this is > breaking? > > * UNIT_TEST_SAVE_CONTEXT - - The last field is a > variable sized array, so it can be a formal field. > * UNIT_TEST_SAVE_HEADER - Can the last 3 fields > be changed to pointers and be formal fields? > * Do the structures really need to be packed? > Specially with the changes suggested above? Is the > intent to potentially share data stored on disk between > different host execution environments that may have > different width architectures? > > > i. That's an interesting point. Could you draw up > your suggestion and submit a PR? > > 1. UnitTestPkg - UnitTestLib.h > * Can you provide more context for the APIs > SaveFrameworkState(), SaveFrameworkStateAndQuit(), > SaveFrameworkStateAndReboot(), > SetFrameworkBootNextDevice(). I do not see any Load() > functions, so how would a set of tests be resumed? If > these do not apply to host based tests, should these be > split out to a different lib class? > > > i. I'll improve the documentation around these > functions. I will acknowledge, however, that this is an > interface that I expect to evolve as we figure out what > kinds of tests the community wants support for "out of > the box". If we want to easily enable tests around - > for example - ExitBootServices, we will likely want to > tweak this going forward to its simplest form. The > version we have here was sufficient to enable the test > cases that we've currently written. > > 1. UnitTestPkg/Library/UnitTestLib > * I see an implementation of MD5. We should not > do our own. We should use an approved implementation > such as OpenSSL. > > > i. Happy to discuss another implementation, but > this is not crypto-strong. It's just for uniqueness. A > sufficiently long CRC would probably work, too. > > 1. UnitTestPkg/Library/UnitTestTerminationLibTbd > * Do we really need this lib instance now? > > > i. This is here so that we can figure out what > this should look like for a host. Host obviously > wouldn't reset, but could conceivably quit. Or maybe > that doesn't make any sense for a host. > > > > - Bret > > > From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> on > behalf of Bret Barkelew via Groups.Io > <bret.barkelew=microsoft.com@groups.io> > Sent: Wednesday, December 4, 2019 10:24:21 AM > To: Andrew Fish <afish@apple.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io > <devel@edk2.groups.io>; Kinney, Michael D > <michael.d.kinney@intel.com> > Cc: rfc@edk2.groups.io <rfc@edk2.groups.io> > Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [edk2-devel] EDK2 Host- > Based Unit Test RFC (Now with docs!) > > > Andrew, > > I agree with your points. > > > > Mike, > > You've got a lot more there. Let me take a look and > update the draft. I'll ping back ASAP. > > > > - Bret > > > > From: Andrew Fish<<a href="mailto:afish@apple.com">mailto:afish@apple.com</a>> > Sent: Wednesday, December 4, 2019 9:50 AM > To: devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>; > Kinney, Michael D<<a href="mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com">mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com</a>> > Cc: Bret Barkelew<<a href="mailto:Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com">mailto:Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com</a>>; > rfc@edk2.groups.io<<a href="mailto:rfc@edk2.groups.io">mailto:rfc@edk2.groups.io</a>> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [edk2-devel] EDK2 Host-Based > Unit Test RFC (Now with docs!) > > > > Mike, > > > > I like and agree with your comments. > > > > On the UnitTestPkg(s) dependency issue I think it would > make sense to move as much as possible into the > *Pkg/Test/ ( *Pkg/HostLibrary, MdePkg/MdePkgTest.dsc, > etc.) directory structure. It looks like for > implementation specific tests we skip the Test > directory and drop the UnitTest or FuzzTest directly > into modules directory. Maybe we should follow the same > pattern as *Pkg/Test and have a Test directory? This > will help minimize the number of "reserved" directories > we need for managing the testing. Have a standardized > directory structure will make it easier to > differentiate the code from tests while doing `git > grep` or other forms of code spelunking. > > > > A Host-Based Unit Test for a Library makes sense as you > can link directly against the library and test it. A > Host-Based Unit Test for Protocol/PPI/GUID [1] seems a > little more complex. It is easy enough to write tests > for the interfaces but what APIs do you call to get > access to the protocol? > > > > Per our conversation at the Stewards meeting I think > make sense to try to roll out the testing of libraries > as the 1st phase. The mocking required for drivers > could get quite complex and let us not get bogged down > in all that to get something working. > > > > [1] *Pkg/Test/UnitTest/[Library|Protocol|Ppi|Guid] > > > > Thanks, > > > > Andrew Fish > > > > > > On Dec 2, 2019, at 3:12 PM, Michael D Kinney > <michael.d.kinney@intel.com<mailto:michael.d.kinney@int > el.com>> wrote: > > > > Hi Bret, > > > > Thanks for posting this content. Host based unit > testing is a very valuable addition to the CI checks. > > > > I have the following comments: > > > > 1. I see that MdePkg adds a dependency on > UnitTestPkg. This makes UnitTestPkg the root package > when building and running host based unit tests. This > makes sense, but good to highlight that all packages > that use host based tests will introduce a new package > dependency on UnitTestPkg. > > * Since the dependency only applies to unit > tests, can we update the DependencyCheck plugin to > support listing dependencies for FW components separate > from dependencies for unit tests? > > 1. I see UnitTestPkg declares 6 new lib classes. > Are all 6 classes intended to be used directly from a > unit test case? If some of these are only intended to > be used from the framework inside the UnitTestPkg can > we make them private? > 2. In the MdePkg, I see a new top level directory > called 'HostLibrary'. Since these lib instances are > only used from a host based test, can they be moved > into the 'Test' directory? > 3. MdePkg/MdePkgTest.dsc. > > * Can this DSC file be moved into the 'Test' > directory? > * I see this DSC file only supports VS today. > How much work is it to add GCC support? > > 1. MdePkg/HostLibrary/BaseLibHost > > * Why are there 2 INFs. One with ASM and one > without ASM? Can we just use the one with ASM and > assume NASM is installed? > * I see the purpose of this lib instance is to > call the > * SetJump()/LongJump(). So these > implementations always work? It looks like it assumes > BASE_LIBRARY_JUMP_BUFFER is identical to the host OS > user mode applicationsetjmp()/longjmp() state. > * Why are DRx and CRx registers emulated? I > would think and code that depends on read/writing these > registers would not be compatible with host based > testing. Can we change to ASSERT (FALSE)? > * PatchInstructionX86() - I suspect this will > not work in a host based environment because it is self > modifying code. Should it be ASSERT (FALSE)? > > 1. MdePkg/HostLibrary/DebugLibHost > > * What is '#ifndef TEST_WITH_KLEE' > * What is the 'PatchFormat()' function? It is > always disabled with if (0). > * Are the PCDs to set the debug message levels > disabled on purpose? (DebugPrintEnabled(), > DebugPrintLevelEnabled(), DebugCodeEnabled()) > > 1. MdePkg/HostLibrary/BaseMemoryLibHost > > * Why can't we use > MdePkg/Library/BaseMemoryLib/BaseMemoryLib/inf instead > and reduce the number of host specific lib instances? > > 1. MdePkg/HostLibrary/MemoryAllocationLibHost > > * Why is are memcpy(), assert(), memset() used > in this lib? I would expect this lib instance to match > the UefiMemoryAllocationLib with the only the use of > malloc() and free() to replace the UEFI Boot Services > calls. > > 1. Host library instance naming conventions. > > * The current naming convention uses the > environment as a prefix(e.g. Pei, Smm, Uefi) and the > services the lib instance uses as a post fix. Would it > make more sense to use 'Host' as a prefix instead of a > postfix in the lib instance names? > > 1. Unicode vs ASCII strings > > * I see InitUnitTestFramework(), > CreateUnitTestSuite(), and AddTestCase() all take > Unicode strings for the labels. I also see extra code > to convert gEfiCallerBaseName from ASCII to Unicode to > use it as a short name of a test framework. I think it > would be simpler if the parameters to these APIs were > ASCII and the framework can convert to Unicode if > needed. > > 1. Will InitUnitTestFramework() and > CreateUnitTestSuite() always be called in pairs? If > so, can we combine these to a single API? > > * I see the SafeIntLib example create a single > framework and multiple test suites. Perhaps we can > have a single CreateUnitTestSuite() API where Framework > is an IN/OUT and if it is passed in as NULL, the > Framework handle is created. > * I see a pattern where the > CreateUnitTestSuite() 'Package' parameter is used as a > prefix to every call to AddTestCase() in the > 'ClassName' parameter. Can we simplify AddTestCase() > so it only need to pass in the name of the unit test > case, and the framework can append Package and the > unit test case name? > > 1. I see the use of the 'Fw' variable as a shorthand > for 'Framework'. Can we use something other than 'Fw'. > It may be confused with 'Firmware'. > 2. UnitTestPkg/Include/UnitTestTypes.h > > * I see several hard coded string lengths. > Since this runs in a host environment and strings can > always be allocated, can the hard coded lengths be > removed? Update the structs to use pointers to strings > instead of string arrays, and the framework can manage > alloc() and free()? > * How are Fingerprints used? The idea of using > as hash as a unique identifier is a good idea. How is > the hash calculated? What unit test code artifacts are > used so developers know what parameters must be unique? > Can we just decide to use a specific hash > algorithm/size and the structure can be a pointer to an > allocated buffer instead of a fixed size array to make > it easy to change the algorithm/size in the future? > * Update all the strings to be ASCII? See > Unicode vs ASCII above. > * UNIT_TEST_SAVE_TEST - The last field is a > variable sized array, so it can be a formal field. > * UNIT_TEST_SAVE_CONTEXT - - The last field is a > variable sized array, so it can be a formal field. > * UNIT_TEST_SAVE_HEADER - Can the last 3 fields > be changed to pointers and be formal fields? > * Do the structures really need to be packed? > Specially with the changes suggested above? Is the > intent to potentially share data stored on disk between > different host execution environments that may have > different width architectures? > > 1. UnitTestPkg - UnitTestLib.h > > * Can you provide more context for the APIs > SaveFrameworkState(), SaveFrameworkStateAndQuit(), > SaveFrameworkStateAndReboot(), > SetFrameworkBootNextDevice(). I do not see any Load() > functions, so how would a set of tests be resumed? If > these do not apply to host based tests, should these be > split out to a different lib class? > > 1. UnitTestPkg/Library/UnitTestLib > > * I see an implementation of MD5. We should not > do our own. We should use an approved implementation > such as OpenSSL. > > 1. UnitTestPkg/Library/UnitTestTerminationLibTbd > > * Do we really need this lib instance now? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Mike > > > > From: devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io> > <devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>> On > Behalf Of Bret Barkelew via Groups.Io > Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 11:39 PM > To: devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io> > Subject: [edk2-devel] EDK2 Host-Based Unit Test RFC > (Now with docs!) > > > > Now that CI has landed in edk2/master, we'd like to get > the basic framework for unittesting staged as well. > Target intercept date would be immediately after the > 2019/11 stabilization, so we wanted to go ahead and get > comments now. > > The host unittest framework consists of five primary > pieces: > - The test library (Cmocka) > - Support libraries (Found in UnitTestPkg) > - The test support plugins (HostUnitTestComilerPlugin, > HostUnitTestDxeCompleteCheck, HostBasedUnitTestRunner) > - The configuration in the package-based *.ci.yaml file > and package-based Test.dsc > - The tests themselves > > We have a demo branch set up at: > <a href="https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fcorthon%2Fedk2-staging%2Ftree%2Fedk2-host-&data=02%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Caf69d76bb76f4a4e152e08d78277a97e%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637121322769998529&sdata=0%2FEUzZG6J3F%2FLnCt0sICGwsxpwjXf7cbUMnQQWeSbtw%3D&reserved=0"> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fcorthon%2Fedk2-staging%2Ftree%2Fedk2-host-&data=02%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Caf69d76bb76f4a4e152e08d78277a97e%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637121322769998529&sdata=0%2FEUzZG6J3F%2FLnCt0sICGwsxpwjXf7cbUMnQQWeSbtw%3D&reserved=0</a> > test_v2<<a href=""></a>https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/ > ?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fcorthon%2Fedk2- > staging%2Ftree%2Fedk2-host- > test_v2&data=02%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C > 6eac9932f3f640dd65ac08d778e731e3%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab > 2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637110806683189828&sdata=JQ%2BoW > xlEBOK2sH55cRAPVa3OpAxTsm6eHcdbWSo9CVo%3D&reserved=0> > We also have a demo build pipeline at: > <a href="https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdev.azure.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2-ci-&data=02%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Caf69d76bb76f4a4e152e08d78277a97e%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637121322770003516&sdata=12H%2FC8YVt%2Fn5ud%2BYOp9vAzs6vk2by46YFTzplhcz1xs%3D&reserved=0"> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdev.azure.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2-ci-&data=02%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Caf69d76bb76f4a4e152e08d78277a97e%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637121322770003516&sdata=12H%2FC8YVt%2Fn5ud%2BYOp9vAzs6vk2by46YFTzplhcz1xs%3D&reserved=0</a> > play/_build?definitionId=36&_a=summary<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fnam06.sa&data=02%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Caf69d76bb76f4a4e152e08d78277a97e%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637121322770003516&sdata=TrBwMkL6jCSS0XiZhegHkA4VQheFvj3auBWkOWD5ysg%3D&reserved=0 > felinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdev.a > zure.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2-ci- > play%2F_build%3FdefinitionId%3D36%26_a%3Dsummary&data=0 > 2%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C6eac9932f3f640 > dd65ac08d778e731e3%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7 > C1%7C0%7C637110806683189828&sdata=wBwn1ehjyTmYNKVSvlEZS > XK5qyeu4EPAL7FzdYntnt4%3D&reserved=0> > > The current demo branch contains a single test in > MdePkg for SafeIntLib (module file > MdePkg\Test\UnitTest\Library\BaseSafeIntLib\TestBaseSaf > eIntLib.inf). This test is automatically detected by > the HostUnitTestComilerPlugin and run by the > HostBasedUnitTestRunner as part of the CI process. > > A few notes about the current demo: > 1) The demo currently only works on Windows build > chains, but there's no reason to believe that it can't > work equally well on Linux build chains, and are happy > to work with anyone to get it there. > > 2) The demo currently has four failing conditions that > can be seen towards the end of MdePkg "Build and Test" > log file for this build: > <a href="https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdev.azure.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2-ci-&data=02%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Caf69d76bb76f4a4e152e08d78277a97e%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637121322770003516&sdata=12H%2FC8YVt%2Fn5ud%2BYOp9vAzs6vk2by46YFTzplhcz1xs%3D&reserved=0"> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdev.azure.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2-ci-&data=02%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Caf69d76bb76f4a4e152e08d78277a97e%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637121322770003516&sdata=12H%2FC8YVt%2Fn5ud%2BYOp9vAzs6vk2by46YFTzplhcz1xs%3D&reserved=0</a> > play/_build/results?buildId=2813<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fnam06.safelink&data=02%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Caf69d76bb76f4a4e152e08d78277a97e%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637121322770003516&sdata=OrhL0m%2BJC5obLQoU%2BgmFS9StJgvv2eEfSj8jsmrt9hI%3D&reserved=0 > s.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdev.azure.c > om%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2-ci- > play%2F_build%2Fresults%3FbuildId%3D2590&data=02%7C01%7 > Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C6eac9932f3f640dd65ac08 > d778e731e3%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7 > C637110806683199782&sdata=1zd2oq8zRZUn3%2FUiGDuJZEZ5M0s > rtc2bqoa0%2BLbZB3s%3D&reserved=0> > "WARNING - Test SafeInt16ToChar8 - Status > d:\a\1\s\MdePkg\Test\UnitTest\Library\BaseSafeIntLib\Te > stBaseSafeIntLib.c:302: error: Failure! > WARNING - TestBaseSafeIntLib.exe Test Failed > WARNING - Test SafeInt32ToChar8 - Status > d:\a\1\s\MdePkg\Test\UnitTest\Library\BaseSafeIntLib\Te > stBaseSafeIntLib.c:638: error: Failure! > WARNING - TestBaseSafeIntLib.exe Test Failed > WARNING - Test SafeIntnToChar8 - Status > d:\a\1\s\MdePkg\Test\UnitTest\Library\BaseSafeIntLib\Te > stBaseSafeIntLib.c:1051: error: Failure! > WARNING - TestBaseSafeIntLib.exe Test Failed > WARNING - Test SafeInt64ToChar8 - Status > d:\a\1\s\MdePkg\Test\UnitTest\Library\BaseSafeIntLib\Te > stBaseSafeIntLib.c:1456: error: Failure!" > These failures seem to be legitimate and further work > should be done by the community to decide whether the > test case is correct or the library is correct, but one > of them needs to change. > > 3) Current demo pulls in test collateral from a fork of > the edk2-test repo. This repo is currently *very* heavy > due to the history of the UEFI SCT project and the > number of binaries that it pulls down. It's possible > that we (the community) need to select a better place > for this code to live. Maybe in edk2 primary (though > it's not explicitly firmware code, so it seems > unnecessary). Maybe in a new edk2-test2 repo or > something like that. > > There's an RFC doc here: > <a href="https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fcorthon%2Fedk2-staging%2Fblob%2Fedk2-host-&data=02%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Caf69d76bb76f4a4e152e08d78277a97e%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637121322770003516&sdata=mroz5b5qSrDo%2FBtl%2BxWqrTDPpaFclIdhgco6yHJFIFo%3D&reserved=0"> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fcorthon%2Fedk2-staging%2Fblob%2Fedk2-host-&data=02%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Caf69d76bb76f4a4e152e08d78277a97e%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637121322770003516&sdata=mroz5b5qSrDo%2FBtl%2BxWqrTDPpaFclIdhgco6yHJFIFo%3D&reserved=0</a> > test_v2/Readme- > RFC.md<<a href=""></a>https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/? > url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fcorthon%2Fedk2- > staging%2Fblob%2Fedk2-host-test_v2%2FReadme- > RFC.md&data=02%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C6 > eac9932f3f640dd65ac08d778e731e3%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2 > d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637110806683199782&sdata=1nq1mHjs > bSZj4IQM5RBwSrvaQxO5cmDlTvf7VYNDV%2FA%3D&reserved=0> > > And a usage guide here: > <a href="https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fcorthon%2Fedk2-staging%2Fblob%2Fedk2-host-&data=02%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Caf69d76bb76f4a4e152e08d78277a97e%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637121322770003516&sdata=mroz5b5qSrDo%2FBtl%2BxWqrTDPpaFclIdhgco6yHJFIFo%3D&reserved=0"> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fcorthon%2Fedk2-staging%2Fblob%2Fedk2-host-&data=02%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Caf69d76bb76f4a4e152e08d78277a97e%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637121322770003516&sdata=mroz5b5qSrDo%2FBtl%2BxWqrTDPpaFclIdhgco6yHJFIFo%3D&reserved=0</a> > test_v2/UnitTestPkg/ReadMe.md<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fnam06.safelinks.p&data=02%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Caf69d76bb76f4a4e152e08d78277a97e%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637121322770003516&sdata=hPFhk5UWEA4JzSl9KyhX8%2Fj44ls5hx6T4i2bz8H9SB0%3D&reserved=0 > rotection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fc > orthon%2Fedk2-staging%2Fblob%2Fedk2-host- > test_v2%2FUnitTestPkg%2FReadMe.md&data=02%7C01%7Cbret.b > arkelew%40microsoft.com%7C6eac9932f3f640dd65ac08d778e73 > 1e3%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637110 > 806683209750&sdata=0jRQ2Rzr9PWSYJ1YDs7l2aFS3PfAnTbTousY > Ye8IWTw%3D&reserved=0> > > Once again, would love to get this into EDK2 master > after stabilization, and most of this has previously > been shopped around in other discussion threads. This > is just where the rubber meets the road and is the > minimal subset of code that needs to land for folks to > start contributing unittests against the core libraries > that can be run as part of any CI pass. > > Thanks! > - Bret > > > > > > > > > </div> </div> </body> </html> <div width="1" style="color:white;clear:both">_._,_._,_</div> <hr> Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. <a target="_blank" href="https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/52266">View/Reply Online (#52266)</a> | | <a target="_blank" href="https://groups.io/mt/68745360/1813853">Mute This Topic</a> | <a href="https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/post">New Topic</a> <a href="https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/editsub/1813853">Your Subscription</a> | <a href="mailto:devel+owner@edk2.groups.io">Contact Group Owner</a> | <a href="https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub">Unsubscribe</a> [edk2-devel-archive@redhat.com] <div width="1" style="color:white;clear:both">_._,_._,_</div>